| Summary: | There are two main approaches to change of state verbs. One adopts an approach in terms of a <i>total change</i> (<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">become</span><i>P</i>, for base predicate <i>P</i>), i.e., a change from not being in the extension of the base predicate to being in it. The other adopts an approach in terms of a <i>relative change</i> (<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">become</span><i>more P</i>, for base predicate <i>P</i>), i.e., a change for a theme in which it increases in the extent to which it holds the property denoted by the base predicate. Different languages have been analyzed using one or the other approach. I argue that both proposals are actually appropriate for analyzing related but not (completely) overlapping phenomena in the domain of derived change of state verbs in the very same language. This proposal is based on the discussion of change of state verbs in Southern Aymara that are derived with the suffixes <i>-pta</i> and <i>-ra</i>. I show that verbs with <i>-pta</i> convey the meaning of <i>total change</i> and that verbs with <i>-ra</i> convey the meaning of <i>relative change</i>. I further discuss how expressions with <i>-pta</i> and <i>-ra</i> interact: expressions with <i>-ra</i> implicate that the theme does not change from not being in the extension of the base to being in it. I propose an account in terms of scalar implicatures in which <i>-pta</i> and <i>-ra</i> are lexical alternatives, thus extending the domain of linguistic phenomena for which the computation of scalar implicatures is relevant.
|
|---|
